Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Transient Shocks and Associated Energetic Particle Events Observed.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Transient Shocks and Associated Energetic Particle Events Observed."— Presentation transcript:

1

2 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Transient Shocks and Associated Energetic Particle Events Observed by ACE during Solar Cycle 23 George C. Ho 1, David Lario 1, Robert B. Decker 1, Mihir I. Desai 2, Qiang Hu 3, Justin Kasper 4 1 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, 2 Southwest Research Institute 3 Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, University of California at Riverside 4 Center for Space Research, MIT Acknowledgement: The work at JHU/APL is supported under NASA grant NNG04GA84G

3 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Outline Introduction ACE ESP events survey –Time-intensity profiles –Spectral evolution –Spectral profiles Selected ACE/Wind ESP events Summary

4 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Energetic Storm Particle (ESP) Events Energetic Storm Particle (ESP) events are increases of energetic charged particle intensities that are observed upstream and downstream of interplanetary (IP) shocks. ESP events are observed most commonly in ion intensities and have time scales ~hours. The energetic particle signatures of ESP events have been studied extensively during the 80s (Tsurutani and Lin, 1985; van Nes et al., 1984; Scholer, 1988; Decker, 1981; etc.). Lee [1983] modeled the energetic particles within ESP events with a diffusive shock acceleration model at a quasi-parallel shock, while Decker [1983] successfully applied the shock drift model to explain the shock-spike events.

5 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Time-intensity Profiles of SEP and ESP Reames, 1999

6 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 SEP and ESP During Cycle 22 Reames, 1999

7 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Large ESP Events Lario and Simnett., 2003

8 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Event Selection From February 1, 1998 to October 28, 2003 the SWEPAM and MAG teams identified a total of 298 interplanetary shocks. Out of these 298 interplanetary shocks, we have selected 191 shocks that were fast and forward and with clear evidences of being driven by or related to the passage of ICMEs, i.e., we have excluded: reverse shocks, slow shocks, shocks associated with CIRs and shocks associated with other structures such as magnetic holes or stream-stream interactions. A total of 97 shocks. We have also excluded those shocks associated with the most intense SEP events (such as the Bastille Day 2000 event, or the November 2001 events). A total of 10 shocks. A preliminary list of Wind interplanetary shocks indicate 124 of the 191 shocks were also detected by Wind, 5 ESP events were selected to examine in detail the spatial and temporal variations of these events in the Earth’s vicinity.

9 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Classification of the 191 ESP events according to their intensity-time profile 63% IP shocks accelerated >47 keV ions 32% IP shocks accelerated >2 MeV ions 20% IP shocks accelerated >38 keV e -

10 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Upstream Magnetic Field Direction ( θ Bn ) Smith (1985)

11 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Vs Correlation between shock parameters and particle signatures

12 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 MAMA Correlation between shock parameters and particle signatures

13 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 rnrn Correlation between shock parameters and particle signatures

14 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005

15 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Correlation between shock parameters and particle signatures

16 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Correlation between shock parameters and particle signatures

17 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Magnetic field power spectrum pc = proton gyrofrequency Normalized magnetic helicity spectrum UT 297/2003

18 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Ambient, shock and peak spectra

19 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Correlation between ambient and peak spectra

20 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Heavy Ion Spectral Signature Desai et al., 2004

21 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 ACE Wind Locations 128 events

22 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 March 18, 2002 (DOY 77) #1

23 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 April 23, 2003 (DOY 113) #2

24 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 July 17, 2002 (DOY 198) #4

25 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Shock Compression Comparison

26 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Shock Speed Comparison

27 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Shock Travel Time vs Observed Transit Time

28 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Physical Separation vs Inferred Separation

29 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Summary –We classified 191 ESP events detected on ACE according to: 1.Energetic ion and electron time-intensity profile 2.Spectral index –63% of transient forward IP shock accelerated ions at >47 keV, while only 32% IP shock accelerated ions at >1.9 MeV –The spectral index of energetic ion: 1.Monotonically increased across the shock; or 2.Fluctuated across the shock crossing –Most of the ion spectral index do not follow the diffusive shock theoretical prediction for an equilibrium spectrum (many shock interactions) –Ion spectra often soften at the shock –We studied 5 ESP events using particles, field, and plasma instruments on both ACE and Wind –The particle intensity and spectra index were very similar at the two spacecraft despite the fact that they were in time separate by more than 400 R E

30 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Summary (continue) –The agreement between the calculated transits times using the fitted shock speeds on ACE with the actual measured transit times is good only up to ~30 minutes –The disagreement between estimated transit time and measured transit time increase when the GSE Y separation were large (> 200 R E ) –This implies a) the shock may not be spherically symmetric at 1 AU, or; b) the shock may not propagate radially, or both –There is relatively good agreement between the fitted shock speed and density compression ratio for the same shock on Wind and ACE


Download ppt "The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Transient Shocks and Associated Energetic Particle Events Observed."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google